Jesus Christ vs Shakespeare

There are more eye-witness accounts, internal and external reports, histories and documentations of the life and actions of Jesus Christ than there is of William Shakespeare.

The direct, first-hand accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry passed down through John the Apostle were carried through successive generations—Polycarp, Irenaeus, and then Eusebius. By the time we reach Eusebius in the 4th century, we are in the fourth generation of Church leaders who had access to the teachings and traditions rooted in the apostles themselves. This preservation of apostolic tradition was crucial for maintaining doctrinal continuity as Christianity spread and faced challenges from various heretical movements.

Let's examine these early church fathers for some historic perspective.

Polycarp learns about Jesus at the feet of the Apostle John

Polycarp knew the Apostle John and sat at his feet learning directly from the man whose feet Jesus washed.

Polycarp, who was the bishop of Smyrna (modern-day Izmir, Turkey), is one of the early Christian figures who was closely associated with the apostles. According to historical sources, Polycarp was a disciple of John, and he is often cited as having been directly mentored by him.

In the book of Revelation, the only two churches Jesus did not rebuke were Smyrna and Philadelphia. While they both received commendation for their faithfulness, Smyrna was recognized for its steadfastness during persecution, and Philadelphia was commended for its faithfulness and for not being lukewarm. 

Polycarp’s connection to John is significant for several reasons. As a leader in the early Christian Church, Polycarp helped preserve and pass on the teachings and practices of the apostles. Polycarp’s own writings and actions were strongly influenced by the teachings of John, and Polycarp is often quoted by early Christian writers as a source of authority on apostolic tradition.

In fact, Polycarp’s death is also an important part of early Christian history. He was martyred around 155 A.D. and is considered one of the early Christian martyrs whose testimony and life helped solidify the faith in the face of persecution.

Early Christian sources, such as the “Martyrdom of Polycarp” and writings from Irenaeus (who was a student of Polycarp), confirm the close relationship between Polycarp and the apostle.

So moving through time we have a sequence of influential disciples who had intimate knowledge passed down to them from an eye-witness.

1. Polycarp (c. 69–155 A.D.): Polycarp was a direct disciple of the Apostle John and one of the key leaders of the early Church. He was the bishop of Smyrna and is best known for his martyrdom, which became a powerful symbol of faith in early Christianity. Polycarp’s writings and his relationship with the apostles made him a vital figure in preserving apostolic teaching.

2. Irenaeus (c. 130–202 A.D.): Irenaeus was a prominent Church Father and a disciple of Polycarp. He became the bishop of Lyons and is best known for his work Against Heresies, which strongly defended orthodox Christian beliefs against Gnostic ideas. Irenaeus often spoke of his personal relationship with Polycarp, recounting how Polycarp had been taught by the Apostle John.

3. Eusebius (c. 260–340 A.D.): Eusebius of Caesarea was a Christian historian and bishop known as the “Father of Church History.” His most famous work, Ecclesiastical History, chronicles the development of Christianity from its origins through the early 4th century. Eusebius, while not a direct disciple of Irenaeus, was influenced by earlier Church Fathers and used their writings as sources for his historical accounts.

So, from Jesus we have John at the foot of the cross, who teaches and instructs Polycarp, who in turn instructs Irenaeus, and finally Eusebius. Eusebius' writing in the 4th century, looking back on the earlier centuries and drawing from the works of both Irenaeus and Polycarp to document the history of the early Church.

Polycarp teaching young Irenaeus about Jesus

Polycarp: Polycarp, being a disciple of the Apostle John, focused primarily on preserving the apostolic teachings and maintaining unity within the Church. While he recognized the importance of the bishop of Rome in maintaining orthodoxy and unity, there is no indication that he viewed the pope as a divinely appointed, infallible figure. He appears to have held the Roman Church in high regard, but the authority he acknowledged was more based on the apostolic succession rather than a claim of divine supremacy.

Old Irenaeus teaches his students and writes about the accounts given by Polycarp

Irenaeus: Irenaeus strongly emphasized the authority of the bishop of Rome in his writings, particularly in his work Against Heresies. In this work, Irenaeus argued that the Roman Church was the most authoritative because it was founded by the apostles Peter and Paul, and its bishops were seen as holding a special, apostolic position. However, Irenaeus did not attribute divine powers or infallibility to the pope. His argument for the primacy of the Roman bishop was based on apostolic succession and the safeguarding of true Christian doctrine, not a claim to divinity or absolute authority.

Eusebius writing his Ecclesiastical History

Eusebius: Eusebius of Caesarea, while writing about the early Church, recognized the authority of the bishop of Rome, but he did not develop the idea of the papacy as having divine or infallible power. Eusebius saw the bishops of Rome as holding a significant leadership role in the Church, but his historical works suggest that the primacy of the Roman bishop was seen more as a matter of tradition and respect rather than divine rule.

While these early Church Fathers acknowledged the importance and authority of the bishop of Rome due to its apostolic foundation...

they did not regard the pope as a divine character or as possessing the kind of spiritual supremacy that later Catholic doctrine attributes to the papacy

(such as papal infallibility or the pope being a “vicar of Christ” with unique divine authority over the Church).

The development of papal authority as seen in later Catholic theology emerged more fully in the centuries after these Fathers, particularly with the rise of the Roman Church’s influence in the 4th to 5th centuries.

So the transmission of first-hand witness accounts about Jesus Christ passed through successive generations of early Christian leaders. From John the Apostle to Polycarp, Irenaeus, and eventually Eusebius, the faith and teachings were passed down with a strong sense of continuity. Here’s how that works across the generations:

1. John the Apostle (1st century): John was one of the twelve apostles and a direct witness to the life, teachings, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. His writings, particularly the Gospel of John and the letters of John, provide a unique and authoritative first-hand account of Jesus’ ministry. He is also believed to have been the last surviving apostle, living into the late 1st century.

2. Polycarp (c. 69–155 A.D.): Polycarp was a disciple of John and is said to have personally known him, which places him in the second generation of Christian leaders after the apostles. Polycarp’s teachings and leadership were grounded in the apostolic traditions that John would have passed down, making him a key figure in maintaining the integrity of the early Church. Polycarp’s death in martyrdom also reinforces the continuity of the apostolic faith.

3. Irenaeus (c. 130–202 A.D.): Irenaeus was a disciple of Polycarp, placing him in the third generation after John. Irenaeus is one of the most significant early Christian theologians, and in his writings, particularly Against Heresies, he defended the apostolic faith and teachings. Irenaeus emphasized the importance of apostolic succession and the authority of the bishops, especially the bishop of Rome, as guardians of true Christian doctrine. His work is one of the most valuable resources we have for understanding the beliefs and practices of the early Church.

4. Eusebius (c. 260–340 A.D.): Eusebius of Caesarea is considered the “Father of Church History.” Writing in the 4th century, he relied heavily on the writings of earlier Church Fathers like Irenaeus, Polycarp, and others to compile the Ecclesiastical History. While he did not personally know the apostles, his work is crucial in documenting the development of the early Church, drawing from those who were direct disciples of the apostles and preserving the historical continuity of Christian teaching.

So, indeed, the direct, first-hand accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry passed down through John the Apostle were carried through successive generations—Polycarp, Irenaeus, and ultimately Eusebius who writes extensively. By the time we reach Eusebius in the 4th century, we are in the fourth generation of Church leaders who had access to the teachings and traditions rooted in the apostles themselves.

This preservation of apostolic tradition was crucial for maintaining doctrinal continuity as Christianity spread and faced challenges from various heretical movements.

It’s safe to say that there is more historically accurate documentation of Jesus Christ than of William Shakespeare in terms of early sources, eyewitness accounts, and the breadth of historical documentation.

1. Eyewitness Accounts and Early Testimonies:

   
   

   • The life of Jesus Christ is documented by multiple early Christian writers, some of whom, like John the Apostle, were direct eyewitnesses to Jesus’ life and ministry. In addition to the Gospels (which are based on eyewitness accounts), early Church Fathers like Polycarp, Irenaeus, and Eusebius preserved and passed down these accounts through their writings. Many of them were also direct disciples of those who had known Jesus personally, creating a chain of transmission that is relatively close to the events themselves.

   
   

   • Additionally, while most of the New Testament writings come from Christian perspectives, there are also mentions of Jesus in non-Christian sources from the 1st and 2nd centuries, such as the Roman historian Tacitus and the Jewish historian Josephus, providing external corroboration of His existence and some aspects of His life.

   
   

2. Proximity to Events:

   
   

   • The Gospels were written within a few decades of Jesus’ life, and many early Christian writings came from individuals who were closely connected to the apostles. Paul’s letters, for instance, were written within 20-30 years of Jesus’ death and are considered some of the earliest Christian writings.

   
   

   • Shakespeare, on the other hand, lived in the 16th century (1564–1616), and much of what we know about him comes from later accounts and documents. The earliest known references to Shakespeare were written many years after his death, and there is no direct testimony from his contemporaries regarding his life or his work in the same way that we have early sources for Jesus.

   
   

3. Volume of Documentation:

   
   

   • The sheer volume of documents written about Jesus Christ (including Gospels, epistles, apocryphal texts, Church Father writings, and early Christian sermons) far exceeds the documentation available about Shakespeare. While there are some historical records and references to Shakespeare, much of what we know about him is based on a handful of documents, many of which were written long after his lifetime. Additionally, some scholars debate aspects of Shakespeare’s life, including his authorship of certain plays.

   
   

4. Historical Impact:

   
   

   • The historical and cultural impact of Jesus has led to an enormous amount of documentation and discussion over the centuries. Christianity spread rapidly in the first few centuries, and early Church leaders worked diligently to preserve the teachings and accounts of Jesus. In contrast, while Shakespeare’s works have had a profound influence on literature and culture, the scope and intensity of early historical documentation about him is not as extensive.

   
   

In summary, while both Jesus Christ and William Shakespeare are monumental figures in history, the documentation of Jesus’ life and teachings is more direct, more extensive, and closer to the events themselves than the documentation of Shakespeare.

The combination of first-hand accounts, early Christian writings, and external sources gives us a more detailed historical record of Jesus’ life compared to what we know about Shakespeare.

M. Joseph Hutzler

Eschatologist